|
Yeah and don't forget people that eat Captain Crunch cereal... pukes!
led mike
|
|
|
|
|
Why IP address? I am behind a firewall with few more people and only of us can vote a message.
Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place. Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are, by definition, not smart enough to debug it. -Brian Kernighan
|
|
|
|
|
Because some moron (Kyle, aka pumpkinhead, aka score1.0, etc) created several dozen accounts to use in mass one voting abuse.
|
|
|
|
|
If only he limited his abuse to voting...
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Chris, hi CPians,
i've just had an idea for the programming forums.
in the same way the owner of a thread has the links [Modify | Delete] for his posts, it could be nice to had a [Resolved].
i thought such a link could automatically prepend the thread's question a "[Resolved]" so that everybody sees if the problem is solved already.
what do you think about it ?
|
|
|
|
|
Sounds like a good idea - however I think that the majority of people wouldn't use it. But, it would still be useful when the odd person that did use it.
|
|
|
|
|
Great idea. Everyone'll use it just like they do the message type icons. 
|
|
|
|
|
I think thats a nice idea.
The Subject could probably be prefixed with a Resloved text or Icon. The reply can also be 5 voted.
Tarakeshwar
MCP, CCIE Q(R&S)
Before you criticize someone, you should walk a mile in their shoes. That way, when you criticize them, you're a mile away and you have their shoes.
!sgub evah t'nseod margorp sihT ?sgub naem ayaddahW
|
|
|
|
|
Nice Idea tox!
:Gong: 歡迎光臨 吐 西批 :Gong:
|
|
|
|
|
Sometimes if a message submit looks like it is taking too long I will hit submit again. Sometimes it will then post it, and other times I was just too eagre and get shown the "It looks like you have already posted this message. Duplicate message has been ignored" message.
It would be really handy if that message could include a link to the original message (the one that you were trying to duplicate).
Currently you have to go back to the forum you were posting in and find the thread again.
|
|
|
|
|
Would it be possible to be able to report a message as spam or abuse and also vote it a 1? Or even automatically register a 1 vote if you report a message as spam or abuse? At the moment if you vote a message a 1, you can't also report it as spam or abuse
Ryan "Punctuality is only a virtue for those who aren't smart enough to think of good excuses for being late" John Nichol "Point Of Impact"
|
|
|
|
|
Ryan Binns wrote: Would it be possible to be able to report a message as spam or abuse and also vote it a 1
It already works like that. When you vote as abuse it gets a 1 vote automatically. I spent a good 3 or 4 minutes thinking this system through. 
cheers,
Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: When you vote as abuse it gets a 1 vote automatically
Cool now i want to test it but which post ..... 
Excuse is a word that human beings came up with to hide from the potential of failure and in doing have robbed themselves of the grace of success.
Code-frog in lounge
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: When you vote as abuse it gets a 1 vote automatically.
Oh good. But when you vote a 1, you can't then subsequently vote as abuse or spam, right?
Chris Maunder wrote: I spent a good 3 or 4 minutes thinking this system through.
Ryan "Punctuality is only a virtue for those who aren't smart enough to think of good excuses for being late" John Nichol "Point Of Impact"
|
|
|
|
|
I find Code Project to be a fantastic resource for me (a dabbler) as anytime I want to write something there's typically been at least one decent article written about it.
Some articles are definitely better than others, so it would be very helpful to be able to sort the results from an article search by Rating (descending). Even an option to only return articles with a rating above a certain threshold like on this message board would be helpful in filtering out all of the 1s and 2s out there.
Is this doable? Please?
Thanks,
Kevin
|
|
|
|
|
Who told you that you cannot find a good article among the low rated ones (with ratings 1s and 2s)?
To my opinion, Rating is not always proportionate to the quality of the article..
Any other thoughts???
L.W.C. Nirosh,
Colombo,
Sri Lanka.
|
|
|
|
|
Nirosh wrote: Who told you that you cannot find a good article among the low rated ones (with ratings 1s and 2s)?
That is like saying you can't find a good meal by raking through your neighbours garbage bin. It can be done, but quite frankly, I wouldn't want the reputation.
|
|
|
|
|
Colin Angus Mackay wrote: That is like saying you can't find a good meal by raking through your neighbours garbage bin. It can be done, but quite frankly, I wouldn't want the reputation.
Base sample is wrong..!! I guess it is not like, what you are saying.. so doesn't count, what you said there after.
L.W.C. Nirosh,
Colombo,
Sri Lanka.
|
|
|
|
|
Ummm... I have no idea what you are saying. Could you rephrase?
|
|
|
|
|
"finding a good article among the low rated ones (with ratings 1s and 2s)" is *not* like "finding a good meal by raking through your neighbours garbage bin", so this conclude that your base point (i.e “finding a good meal by raking through your neighbours garbage bin”) is wrong, so because of that, what you built on top of that also wrong. So your whole reply is wrong.
Hope this is clearer..
L.W.C. Nirosh,
Colombo,
Sri Lanka.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm never wrong! 
It doesn't have to be your neigbours garbage bin - it can be anybody's.
Anyway, I'd contend that I'm still right on the grounds of value of time. My time is valuable. I know that I can find a good meal by raking through garbage bins, however it will take me a long time to do that and I'll get very messy in the process. I can also find a good article among the 1 and 2 votes but, again, it will take me a long time to do that. Time I could have spend better reading the highly rated articles instead. And instead of raking through my neighbours garbage bin I could just have gone to that nice restaurant down the street.
|
|
|
|
|
Colin Angus Mackay wrote: I'm never wrong!
I am sure YOU ARE NOT.
Colin Angus Mackay wrote: It doesn't have to be your neigbours garbage bin - it can be anybody's.
OK, lol
Colin Angus Mackay wrote: I know that I can find a good meal by raking through garbage bins, however it will take me a long time to do that and I'll get very messy in the process.
Here you go.. You know Colin, I just had a look at your profile, and also scrolled down to see what that long messages are all about..
I never ever found or find or expected to find a good meal in anybody's garbage bin. But I think you have and that is why I get all these comments/ advice about garbage bins and good meal, I can imagine how bad that experience would be.., but Colin, I guess you are heading the correct direction. Yes eat from good restaurants and stop eating from garbage bins that indeed drop your weight down.. (Please take this as a joke, I am not intend to harm you in any manner) Just try it since I say 
But I had/ have found gems in low rated articles.. and have seen bad articles, with some unbelievable misatkes.. among high rated articles..
L.W.C. Nirosh,
Colombo,
Sri Lanka.
|
|
|
|
|
Nirosh wrote: Please take this as a joke, I am not intend to harm you in any manner
Don't worry - My comments were a bit of a joke also. Not everyone understands my odd sense of humour.
Nirosh wrote: But I had/ have found gems in low rated articles
I don't doubt you can occasionally find a diamond in the rough.
Nirosh wrote: and have seen bad articles, with some unbelievable misatkes.. among high rated articles..
That can happen also - but usually the voting system is such that those articles will sink to the bottom evenually.
|
|
|
|
|
I don't believe I said you cannot find a good article among the low rated ones.
The purpose of a search facility is to help users find what they're looking for as quickly as possible. My premise is that higher rated articles are, on the whole, more useful than lower rated articles. You also believe this to some degree when you say "Rating is not always proportionate to the quality of the article."
If my goal was to read all of the articles for a specific result set in the hope of finding the best article for me, then not filtering on rating may make sense. However, since I'm simply looking for the first article that suits my needs, it stands to reason that looking at the higher rated articles first will get me to that article that suits my needs much faster.
Thanks,
Kevin
|
|
|
|
|
yeap, I agree..
If I remeber it correctly, the feature you are looking for was there some time back,
now it is not..
L.W.C. Nirosh,
Colombo,
Sri Lanka.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
